Opposing Maori seats is not racist

If you want to know why Donald Trump is getting so much support,it is because of the politically correct who try to close down debate. We see this in NZ, where some people who don’t believe in free speech have complained that Mike Hosking expressed an opinion against Maori only wards on Council. They call him racist.

A “racist” editorial outburst from TVNZ personality Mike Hosking may have landed him in hot water.

After TVNZ’s Seven Sharp aired a segment on the abuse New Plymouth mayor Andrew Judd received for proposing a Maori ward for local government councils, Hosking added his own two cents.

“Sad to say I’d never personally attack him obviously but he’s completely out of touch with middle New Zealand,” Hosking said.

He went on to say: “There’s nothing wrong with Maori representation on councils cause any Maori that wants to stand for a council is more than welcome to do so and you can sell your message and if you’re good enough you’ll get voted on.”

In a statement Radio New Zealand received from TVNZ, a spokesperson for the broadcaster said a formal complaint had been laid against Hosking and a committee would review the complaint in the coming days.

“In terms of the dialogue between colleagues, there has been some discussion about this piece as you’ve seen – robust conversation and differing viewpoints are not unusual in the current affairs environment,” the spokesperson said.

One complaint on Seven Sharp Facebook page came from a medical student called Kera May.

“Deeply offended by the racism exhibited by Mike Hosking on your show tonight. If anyone is “out of touch with Middle New Zealand” (which includes many Maori like myself thank you very much!) it’s you Mike.”

This is what people hate. Sell appointed guardians of speech who proclaim anyone who disagrees with them to be racist.

It is not racist to oppose Maori only seats on local bodies. It is absurd to suggest it is.

One can agree with all the sentiments about wanting Maori to get better outcomes than they do at present, but also be against Maori only seats because you think they are a bad solution. Being against a particular solution does not make you racist. It is called political debate.

For example the Government has a programme called Whanua Ora designed to help (mainly Maori) families. Now one might oppose this programme on the grounds some of the spending is low quality and it has high overheads. That doesn’t make you racist or not wanting to get better outcomes for Maori. It just means you disagree with that particular policy.

Ms May’s complaint is ridiculous. She is saying that anyone who disagrees with her is racist. This sort of politically correct attitude of trying to control what people can say is what leads to demagogues like Donald Trump.

What we need as a country is an intelligent discussion and debate on the pros and cons of things like Maori only seats – not just calling people who disagree with you racist – a term that is used so often now it has become near meaningless.

mikenmild

Jigsaw

MM- you obvious have a very frail grasp of democracy. Following your ‘logic’ if we gave all Maori two votes each that wouldn’t deprive anyone of a vote either. Or maybe three or four……by your logic this still would not deprive anyone else of a vote. For some reason -perhaps your leftie position, you can’t see that democracy is lost by small degrees which is what is happening in this country. Be clear MM these are to have been unelected, appointed Maori people -selected by race who would have had full voting rights on every committee they were on. This is exactly what has happened in Masterton just last week. I think you and a lot of others need to
re-read ( I assume that you know something) the way in which democracy as we know it has developed over the centuries. Worth also looking at the figures for the rejection by the public (when they were given the opportuntity) of the concept of separate Maori council seats or wards. Incidentally the Maori seats in parliament have fewer electors per electorate than other seats and yes I would say under MMP the Maori seats have had a detrimental effect on our democracy.

mikenmild

Jigsaw
You are very confused. I didn’t talk about giving anyone extra votes, or appointing unelected people to councils. A ward for Maori electors does not deprive anyone else of a vote.
You are wrong about the Maori electorate seats. The number of electors per seat is roughly the same as for general electorate. If all Maori chose to go on to the Maori electoral roll, there would be over 10 Maori seats.
The original decision to set up Maori seats was a distortion of democracy, designed to stop Maori from having too many voted at a time when they considerably outnumbered Europeans.
The other notable distortion of the NZ electoral system was the country quota, designed to advantage rural interests opver urban voters.

Jigsaw

MM – Wow, time you read some history and carefully this time. The Maori seats were created to give Maori representation at a time when because of property qualifications, few other males had a vote. If you bother to read the immigration graphs of the time you will see that immigration from Europe in the 1860’s was increasing rapidly. The idea that pakeha of the time feared Maori swamping them is simply ludicrous and is pure Ranginui Walker spin which you seemed to have swallowed hook, line and sinker. Surprise!!
Of course separate Maori representation – done the way it was proposed in New Plymouth and in Masterton would effectively mean that Maori would have two votes – which you seem to approve of. In Rotorua this is what has happened. There is to be no election among Maori, just appointed representatives from the major tribe with Maori still able to vote on the ordinary roll. Check it.

Jigsaw

Just checked again and the pakeha (for want of a better word) population passed the Maori population of New Zealand in around 1855/6 and by the time separate Maori representation was given in 1967 the pakeha population exceeded Maori by at least 100%. So that’s Ranginui Walker’s theory down the drain. Check it yourself if you still believe his propaganda MM.

mikenmild

Looking at the history of the Maori seat, I see that both Jigsaw and I had only part of the story:

The electoral franchise established under the 1852 New Zealand Constitution Act was theoretically colour-blind. In reality, though, very few Māori men could qualify under the property requirement because they possessed their lands communally (as iwi, hapu or whanau groups) and not under individual freehold or leasehold title as Europeans did. Only about 100 Māori voted in the first general election in 1853, out of a total electorate of 5849. In 1859 the British Crown Law Office confirmed that Māori could not vote unless they had individual title granted by the Crown.

European colonists generally welcomed this state of affairs because they did not think Māori were yet ‘civilised’ enough to exercise such an important responsibility. They were also worried that if large numbers of Māori were enrolled, they could swamp the votes of settlers in many North Island electorates.

In any case, in the 1850s and 1860s few Māori were interested in the ‘Pakeha Parliament’; they preferred to deal directly with the governor (and the Queen) or, like the Kingitanga, create their own political structures.

During the wars of the early 1860s, some European politicians argued that it was vital to assimilate Māori into the political mainstream to ensure lasting peace between the two races. They were also keen to reward those Māori tribes who had fought alongside the Crown.

After much debate, in 1867 Parliament agreed to set up four electorates specifically for Māori – three in the North Island and one covering the whole South Island. This solution was similar to the ‘special representation’ introduced for gold miners earlier that decade.

To avoid difficulties with property ownership, all Māori men over 21 years of age were eligible to vote (and stand for Parliament). The small number of Māori who owned individual freehold land were still allowed to vote in the European electorates. This dual vote would survive until 1893.

lilman

MR Judd,he can get his knob out of his hand and leave.

What an insult to my children to think they can never achieve anything because they a maori,what a disgrace.

Go to hell all of the so-called Maori leaders who jump to defend the fishing rights around the Kermadec Islands,wring their hands for rights to be given to them for having a perceived different blood in their veins so they can walk into boards and councils.

Where were the arsewipes when a young child is beaten abused ,starved and then killed?

Not a word.NOT A BLOODY WORD.

My childfren will aspire to be good kiwis and do their part for the whole of their region.